As part of Coming Out Week at Gustavus, the Queers & Allies painted the infamous rock on the hill in rainbow stripes on Sunday evening. By Monday morning, the rock had been repainted completely black with an anti-homosexuality Bible verse referenced in red.
Q&A sprang into action, repainting the rock to its original rainbow theme Monday afternoon. The perpetrators of the repainting have not been identified, but Gustavus Student Senate issued a statement on Monday evening concerning the act.
In an e-mail to the student body, Student Senate declared that they “denounce the act of hate that was performed against GLBT people and Q&A. We maintain that hate, in any form, has no place in our community and will not be tolerated.”
President Jack Ohle also sent an e-mail on Wednesday concerning the incident which he described as members of the community “openly disrespect[ing] others by painting over the rock that had been painted this week to express support for those celebrating ‘Coming Out Week’”.
Ohle said a campus-wide forum is being planned to take place before Fall Break during which civility and respect for others will be discussed.
I’m sad to hear that such juvenile behavior continues on campus, but I’m glad to hear that the Student Senate and college administration responded so swiftly. As someone who was closeted at Gustavus, homophobic actions such as this helped to keep me from coming out but not from being gay. To the people who painted the rock black (ironic if you think about it because closets are dark), your arrogance and ignorance astounds me. To Q&A, I wish you all the best. And to the closeted students out there, come join me in life outside of the closet. It will be a bit daunting at first, but the rewards are immense.
The pride week rock was painted over by a few “straight” frat boys in 1999 with messages of straight pride, but did not cause much of a stir. The freshly renamed LGBT group, Q & A, had a brief and diplomatic dialogue with the fraternity in question which resulted in the frat repainting it in rainbow flags. I guess we got some pleasure out of watching that if nothing else! We may not be done with the painting over of our pride week rock (there will always be a few frightened zealots, lurking in closets) but it is heartening to know Gustavus is now paying attention and responding, and taking these matters seriously.
I hunted to determine if this College is connected with a synod and haven’t found any yet. Psalm 5:5 says God hates those who do evil. Leviticus indicates homosexuality is an evil. “It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God.”
Jesus was silent on the issue of homosexuality. Isn’t he the final authority on the issue for Christians? And Leviticus states a lot of things that Christians don’t abide by anymore.
Jesus was not silent on Homosexuality. He is part of the God that wrote the whole Bible. As a matter of fact Jesus verified the whole Old Testament in the story of the ‘Rich man and Lazarus’. So he did comment on homosexuality. The 39 books of the OT are assured by Jesus own words. It is the 27 books of the NT, which I accept, that might be in question.
Personally, my definition of a Christian means they accept the Bible in its entirety and don’t pick and choose parts. We have a much different definition of a Christian.
The whole Bible, you say, without picking and choosing? So you believe that women should wear hajibs (as is the custom with orthodox Muslims and Jews).
“Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her as a covering.” (1 Corinthians 11:13-15)
and that a woman who is not a virgin on her wedding night should be stoned?
“If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl’s virginity can be found, 21 she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you.” (Deuteronomy 22:20-21)
And you are pro-slavery?
“Thy bond-men and thy bond-maids which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you: of them shall ye buy bond-men and bond-maids. Moreover, of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land. And they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession, they shall be your bond-man forever.” (Leviticus 25:44-46)
Thankfully, Gustavus encourages a more mature interpretation of the Christian faith.
I emailed my comment to the newspaper and just now thought of how to make it a comment.
First off, God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. The Words of God and their meaning doesn’t mature or change either. God is not bound by the supreme court decisions, mine or yours.
Have you noticed the Amish women have a modest doily on their heads? This is an indicator of God’s social hierarchy. Have you read in Ex 21:23 that the husband sues for the abuse of his wife? If you read the rest of the whole bible about the authority and duty of a husband, I think you should conclude God designates a man as the head of the house and men jointly for society but also makes him individually responsible. His justice and the stories of Judgment day indicate each individual man will be judged on his own sins. (Ex 18, Deut 6, Eph 6)
In the story when the Sadducees asked about the seven brothers and the one woman, Jesus indicates death breaks the one flesh relationship. If a woman doesn’t have a hymen, she has made one flesh with another man and thus is not faithful to the first one. I read that faithfulness is one of the Ten Commandments. Stoning was the system God designed to comply with Deut 22 examples of one flesh He made to regulate society. Remember the “Earth is the LORD”S, and the fullness……” and He will come back to ask and judge each of us stewards how we used His property. How will you designate who is to be an inheritor if men and women aren’t faithful all the time? God in his wisdom gave humans a hymen to keep control of His property. Personally, I consider if one is unfaithful and there is a divorce, I relate to that one as dead.
I know of the situation when a person can decide to be a slave to a certain person and the new owner nails his ear to the doorpost. I have considered if I should have my ear nailed to the doorpost of my church building to be symbolic that I am a slave to the God of the Bible. I note this is a voluntary decision on my part, but it is meant to last until death. Many of the epistles begin with Paul labeling himself as a dedicated servant to God. Besides, the owner is given duties of ownership and abuse is forbidden. I’m not worried God will abuse me. I think deriding slavery completely is throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I should never be a leader, but I think I can be a constructive under a leader.
Thank you, Carl, for proving my point.
Tracie
Tracie, What is your point? How did I prove it?
The phrase ‘a more mature interpretation’ suggests after time sinful humans can improve on God’s word. I said His word and its meaning doesn’t change.